I'd say the doctor example is a bad analogy. They save people day in and day out. Most of the people they save are likely not criminals to that extent. Further, a doctor cannot know who is a pedophile just by saving their life. If a person comes in with a gunshot wound, there is no way for the doctor to know if the person is a pedophile or not. They may find out AFTER the fact, for whatever reason. Doctors are not required to do a background check before performing emergency surgery. Are doctors required to know a patients criminal record before seeing them for care? I really do not see your point. 
That is much different than someone like Harley who defends those types of people all day along, knowing full well the extent of their crimes.
Depends on the setting.
If you're a doctor/surgeon that works for a city's correctional facilities, then yes, everyone who you treat or operate on will have a criminal record, does this mean that these doctors/surgeons are without morals and disgusting, because they chose to work for the city's correctional facilities where they would be catering to the worst humanity has to offer?
Not to mention that if you have ever spent enough time within any of New York's city hospitals (think Bellevue, Elmhurst, Kings County, Woodhull etc), you'll notice that a reasonable percentage of patients that are brought in are actually brought in by the Police Department and are usually handcuffed to the bed while awaiting treatment. In any of these cases, the doctor/surgeon who provides these clients with treatment, be it lifesaving surgery or regular medical care, knows very well that they are treating a criminal. Does treating these criminals substantiate them as being people without morals and absolutely disgusting? Or does it simply suggest that they are good at a role and enjoy tackling cases that are difficult with an added twist (the criminality aspect of it)? Remember, these doctors/surgeons can legally refuse to treat these patients by claiming that they fear the interference of their emotions in the treatment of the patient.
I guess what I am trying to figure out is why you would see Harley as morally reprehensible and disgusting due to his wanting to perform his job by serving people that are morally bankrupt. I am not a close friend of Harley, nor have I ever met him in person, but I do like to try and understand what mechanisms people use when casting judgment upon others. I know you probably have a load of psychological reasons, hence why I specifically ask you (you're more prepared to answer than most).
I have many friends that practice criminal law. They seem like good people from where I sit. They participate in their communities, usually have good families ties and try their best to be helpful to others. Maybe there is more to them than I am able to see. Maybe they have a dark side that might be in line with what you possibly see in Harley. In any case, I just wanted to know what thought process led you to labeling Harley as someone that is disgusting and without morals.
Due to the pony tail, I can understand if you find him fashionably reprehensible, but the rest, I am not sure..
"
1"
